Hey Tankers, let us know what you think of the new Matchmaker. Notes here:

9.20.1 Notes

Improvements to the Matchmaker

Now, the matchmaker attempts to assemble the teams considering the roles within the vehicle types: e.g., the Maus is matched against another Maus, Type 5 Heavy, or E 100, while the T57 Heavy is matched against the AMX 50B, etc. However, in some situations, the matchmaking by roles will not be mirrored, e.g. in case of Platoons that comprise vehicles of different roles.

Increased the chance of getting ranked at the top of the list for Platoon players.

Equal chances of getting ranked in the top/middle/bottom of the list for different vehicle classes (previously, heavy and medium tanks would end up in single-level battles way too often, while SPGs and TDs tended to get ±2 and ±1 setups).

The idea of trying to arrange particular sub-classes (autoloaders, super-heavies, etc) to have equal numbers on both teams is all well and good in theory, however I see it as a circuitous way of avoiding the elephant in the room, and that is tier spreads and team-dependency otherwise. Besides, its only as good in practice as the arbitrary decisions of which tank fits into which category and how well balanced they are against one-another. Circonflexes had a stream shortly after 9.20.1 went live and his reaction to sub-class balancing should more than suffice.

Tier spreads are a much more crucial issue because the balance between armor and penetration gets totally thrown out the window in many +/-2 tier scenarios. Until premium ammo is given a proper re-work, I can't stress enough how important it is to run the 5/10 MM template as standard and to use the 3/5/7 only as a backup plan. Compared to the ramifications of those issues, sub-class balancing is completely trivial.

As of the attempt to make grand battles more frequent, this was also a step in the right direction, but yet again a very small step. The issue remains that grand battles are still infrequent at best, rely on dumb luck to enter, and occur at tier 10 exclusively. Possible solutions would be to assign a given window of time (maybe a few hours each night or maybe a whole day in every week) in which any tier 10 that enters the random queue gets diverted to grand battles exclusively. This solves two problems- it gives tier 10s a reliable way to enjoy grand battles, and in that same window of time, tier 8s get a reprieve. An alternative would be to let the tier 8s have their own grand battles. Tier 8 actually has the population to run the mode reliably and it would serve the purpose of keeping the number of tier 8s in the queue under control. In fact, the grand battles could be used to manage any tier whose population is significantly greater than adjacent tiers.

And the other major issue to consider is team-dependency. Unfortunately its a core aspect of the game that'll be difficult to affect. Still, it should be noted that a major source of frustration with the MM dynamic is having to rely so heavily on teammates with whom communication and coordination has been made so difficult. Typed messages can't be easily done in the middle of combat or maneuvers, and voice communication can only be arranged with two other players at a time. This is a major concern that has been woefully ignored. WG does realize that a 'mute all' function could exist, don't they? But a simple and practical way to relieve this frustration would be to set up random battles with smaller team counts. Smaller teams would mean the snowball effect couldn't build up as much and any individual wouldn't rely so desperately on the team to avoid such an outcome. It would also mean each individual would have more unoccupied space in the map to work with, and would also have more carry potential. In light of that, I urge WG to consider 12v12, 10v10, and 8v8 random battle formats.

if WG really wanted to make the game enjoyable, they would use their PR system to balance teams before a match starts. its pretty freaking simple if they would just select the 30 tanks for the battle, then adjust players (back and forth between the teams) based on "WG Personal Rating System" and make teams balanced to within 2k total.. so if one teams total PR is 28k, the other teams should be anywhere from 26 to 30K total (not hey, you get a total of 15k and the other team gets a total of 50K)... PR isn't perfect, but its a lot better then giving one team nothing but pure trash / bots over and over and over again.. its no wonder people are walking away. game has turn into a game of trash.. next they will tell u how their MM and RNG is correct, but then turn around and have bug after bug in this game after this many years?. .I guess they want us to believe their RNG or MM isn't bugged? give it a rest. now, back to WWII, no RNG (Ruins Numerous Games) over here

if WG really wanted to make the game enjoyable, they would use their PR system to balance teams before a match starts. its pretty freaking simple if they would just select the 30 tanks for the battle, then adjust players (back and forth between the teams) based on "WG Personal Rating System" and make teams balanced to within 2k total.. so if one teams total PR is 28k, the other teams should be anywhere from 26 to 30K total (not hey, you get a total of 15k and the other team gets a total of 50K)... PR isn't perfect, but its a lot better then giving one team nothing but pure trash / bots over and over and over again.. its no wonder people are walking away. game has turn into a game of trash.. next they will tell u how their MM and RNG is correct, but then turn around and have bug after bug in this game after this many years?. .I guess they want us to believe their RNG or MM isn't bugged? give it a rest. now, back to WWII, no RNG (Ruins Numerous Games) over here

This game can NEVER be balanced because it basic core is completely flawed. Tanks of earlier eras almost never met more advanced tanks of a later era and if they did because countries were forced to use them it was a complete and utter slaughter. That is what the gold ammo is for try to balance this idiotic notion out. It doesn't work as you see and never will.

This game can NEVER be balanced because it basic core is completely flawed. Tanks of earlier eras almost never met more advanced tanks of a later era and if they did because countries were forced to use them it was a complete and utter slaughter. That is what the gold ammo is for try to balance this idiotic notion out. It doesn't work as you see and never will.

So true. You would have to hold so many variables constant, controlled, and static (and the ammo you point out) for the earlier era tanks to even manage a hit, a pen, or to do some damage on a newer era vehicle, that it would be such a tactical defeat and utter destruction of armor on the older era tanks that it would be carnage! The older vehicles would have to camp at a safe distance, to be able to run away fast enough not be destroyed, after their 1st 2-3 shots, and then probably be taken out with longer range guns and weapons while trying to form an organized retreat to the next position etc.

Those vehicles would be better off placing themselves in high up fortified defensive positions, with hard structure cover (ex: rocks, mountains, structures, camo positions, etc. and shooting down at range etc. Or else saving the armor all together, for situations they could be used in more adequate situations later.

This game can NEVER be balanced because it basic core is completely flawed. Tanks of earlier eras almost never met more advanced tanks of a later era and if they did because countries were forced to use them it was a complete and utter slaughter. That is what the gold ammo is for try to balance this idiotic notion out. It doesn't work as you see and never will.

Precisely why I advocated for tighter MM spreads. Quitting +/-2 tier MM cold turkey may be difficult to do, but it would solve so many problems and would be so easy to just make the 5/10 template more frequently used than 3/5/7. The whole armor versus penetration dynamic becomes completely dysfunctional when tier spreads allow situations where armor-reliant tanks are invalidated by high-pen guns, and vice versa. And the current code 22 mechanics do help in certain circumstances (low tiers needing extra pen to stand a chance), but otherwise cause problems. Should just abandon the concept of 'premium ammo' altogether, sell slot 2 shells with high pen for similar prices as standard shells, but give them a new drawback of lower damage.

The templated system is the biggest single issue not forgetting the asinine stun mechanic. Advocating for an even more restrictive system isn't the answer. The previous MM with some of the recent tweaks to the new system would have sufficed and anyone who argues for only same tier or one tier spreads just doesn't understand the game.

15-5 is still not fixed (must mean it's not related to MM). If there's ANYTHING in WoT that makes me want to stop playing it's 15-5 result matches.

seriously, fix it, we all HATE these matches that are "balanced" for us by WG.

CM, for the love of god, tell home office that it's VERY obvious when teams are getting "balanced" forcefully. From a WG FAQ and Dev answer "15-5 doesn't happen too much." (It happens just as much as it's programmed to happen.)

Are you serious? You need to see the games from me end where I'm sitting. You want believe it. Their even far worse than that. 3-15 are becoming a greater norm. 1-15 is becoming a new often occurrence!'

A Garage Win Rate I had of 48.77% at the start of the 9.20 patch drop, has fallen now all the way down to 48.60%. (17%) That's a lot of battles actually. I have never fallen below 48.70% in ever (garage stat) ever since I attained it...! It has been as high as 48.85%. But, I'm not even counting that. I'm only consider the fact that I have never fallen below 48.70% threshold for me ever like this.

I can tell you that, "Something is really wildly out of control here!" And it's not just myself "crying" about my win rate. Something is not right here.

Are you serious? You need to see the games from me end where I'm sitting. You want believe it. Their even far worse than that. 3-15 are becoming a greater norm. 1-15 is becoming a new often occurrence!'

A Garage Win Rate I had of 48.77% at the start of the 9.20 patch drop, has fallen now all the way down to 48.60%. (17%) That's a lot of battles actually. I have never fallen below 48.70% in ever (garage stat) ever since I attained it...! It has been as high as 48.85%. But, I'm not even counting that. I'm only consider the fact that I have never fallen below 48.70% threshold for me ever like this.

I can tell you that, "Something is really wildly out of control here!" And it's not just myself "crying" about my win rate. Something is not right here.

A .17% change in win rate (not 17% but .17%) is not "wildly out of control" and is more related to how you play than to something sinister.

It is for me. And does not justify the rest of the player base complaining of the same issue, problem and phenomenon.

You've always been a reckless exaggerator so nothing new there. The player base, although I don't think you and the half dozen others who constantly complain are the player base, has been complaining about MM since I first installed the game so nothing new there.

I recommend this game very highly to mature individuals who are not expecting immediate gratification.

Players who enjoy a long and also steep learning curve will enjoy the amazing complexity, the chance to do research and apply what they learn to not only battle strategy and tactics but also organizational and management duties.

I've been PC gaming since 1990 and this is the all-around best game I have ever played.

Are you serious? You need to see the games from me end where I'm sitting. You want believe it. Their even far worse than that. 3-15 are becoming a greater norm. 1-15 is becoming a new often occurrence!'

A Garage Win Rate I had of 48.77% at the start of the 9.20 patch drop, has fallen now all the way down to 48.60%. (17%) That's a lot of battles actually. I have never fallen below 48.70% in ever (garage stat) ever since I attained it...! It has been as high as 48.85%. But, I'm not even counting that. I'm only consider the fact that I have never fallen below 48.70% threshold for me ever like this.

I can tell you that, "Something is really wildly out of control here!" And it's not just myself "crying" about my win rate. Something is not right here.

Hellsfog, on Nov 16 2017 - 15:15, said:

A .17% change in win rate (not 17% but .17%) is not "wildly out of control" and is more related to how you play than to something sinister.

Actually, given his number of games it is apparent that there has been a sea change and the average battle tier has increased by a substantial margin. We've been saying, if you care to read, that the game has become significantly harder at the middle to higher middle tiers which is where most people play. It still seems intentional to make the player base play up (not an attempt to make MM work better).

Wargaming and WoT sucks. This game is nothing more than an illogical carnival act designed to make its owners as much money as possible regardless of how unethical they may be. World of Tanks is no war game that tests any skill in armored warfare or tactics as they publicly claim. Originally, WoT was a great game but the result of a bunch of nerds and game boys who focus more on their stats than being a team player and the Wargaming developers who balance the capabilities of all vehicles to ensure that everyone gets a trophy has reduced this game to a a joke of Wargaming fraudulently claiming that it has something to do with Tanks. This is not Tanking or replication of armored warfare, the people playing this game are not Tankers and Wargaming has proven that they are focused only on their profit margin and their whining little girlfriends in the their gold league.

I have continued playing this game only to enjoy spending time with my friends in my organization, which Wargaming most ridiculously terms a "clan". What idiot came up with using clan to describe a group of tanks?

Warning to anyone new to this game. Get out and never look back. Wargaming has proven themselves inconsiderate of the majority of their players, exceptionally deceptive. Do not trust these people.

You really sound like a butt hurt child.

" a bunch of nerds and game boys " would be the dead giveaway IMO.

You're just PO'd because you've got all the way to low end of average in 5 years and 47+k battles.

FYI the term clan is used in almost every internet based game out there to define a group of players who play together.

There are more connotations to clan than the KKK you know. The word was part of the vernacular prior to that group.

Many Scots and Irish consider their families as clans to this day. Nothing to do with morons travelling the countryside lighting cross shaped fires or dressing up in pillowcases and bedsheets.

WoT has nothing to do with tanks? Give me a toke of that stuff you're on!